locked
App-V cache behavior while changing server RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hi everyone, I was asking myself about a specefic cache behavior while changing App-V server.

    Here is the scenario:

    We are using App-V Full Infra for our Citrix Server. We are planning to use SCCM 2012 pretty soon and we will use it to deliver our virtualized software to our client.

    I need to be sure that the apps already in cache will not get removed by that change. The server for the App-V client will change because the App-V application source root will get changed to the SCCM infra when the SCCM client will get installed.

    I am probably sure that the cache will remain untouched and that the apps will get replaced by time when the new version will launch but I need some validation.

    I know that SCCM 2012 is not released yet but I guess that the same behavior will happen with SCCM 2007 or by replacing the Full Infra server by another one.

    Thank you for your comments and if you need more info, I'll provide them with pleasure.

    Thank you

    Mathieu

    Thursday, August 25, 2011 1:57 PM

Answers

  • Hi finally got the chance to test the behavior last night.

    By what I have seen, when the SCCM 2012agent is insalled, it will not take over the publishing server like it used to be.

    I was able to use the App-V software deoployed by the full infra from my lab.

    I tried to install the same application using SCCM 2012 and the result was that SCCM detected that the software was installed and did not deployed it a second time. The software was downloaded int he SCCM cache.

    My only problem was that when I forced the software to get remove from cache (deleting the software manually from the client) and removing the publishing server, SCCM was still seeing the software as installed and did not reinstalled the software automatically.

    I had to uninstall the software using SCCM and the reinstall it.

    I will make more test today if I have the chance but this was the result I got yesterday.

    More to come on this later :)

     

    Mathieu

    • Marked as answer by mdesjardins Thursday, April 26, 2012 7:27 PM
    Thursday, September 1, 2011 3:45 PM

All replies

  • Hello,

    I suggest you setup a lab and test your specific environment requirements using a production like scenario - using the currently avaialble System Center Configuration Manager 2012 beta or release candidate bits.

    Once the final bits are available - I suggest you retest the scenario to ensure nothing changed from your previous test.
    /Znack
    Saturday, August 27, 2011 6:12 PM
  • Mathieu,

    When you switch to using SCCM to handle your virtual apps, the SCCM client takes over the role of "publishing server", during this "take over" the CM client proceeds to PURGE all applications in the AppV cache via a cleanup function. It does this because the method it accesses the OSD files changes from "RTSP" to a "File://\\" protocol so it needs to redownload all of the OSD files from the newly published integrated apps from SCCMs distribution points.

    Jose

    • Proposed as answer by kewljoe Thursday, September 1, 2011 3:31 PM
    Thursday, September 1, 2011 3:30 PM
  • Hi finally got the chance to test the behavior last night.

    By what I have seen, when the SCCM 2012agent is insalled, it will not take over the publishing server like it used to be.

    I was able to use the App-V software deoployed by the full infra from my lab.

    I tried to install the same application using SCCM 2012 and the result was that SCCM detected that the software was installed and did not deployed it a second time. The software was downloaded int he SCCM cache.

    My only problem was that when I forced the software to get remove from cache (deleting the software manually from the client) and removing the publishing server, SCCM was still seeing the software as installed and did not reinstalled the software automatically.

    I had to uninstall the software using SCCM and the reinstall it.

    I will make more test today if I have the chance but this was the result I got yesterday.

    More to come on this later :)

     

    Mathieu

    • Marked as answer by mdesjardins Thursday, April 26, 2012 7:27 PM
    Thursday, September 1, 2011 3:45 PM